Thursday, September 4, 2008

Palin Opened Up, So Let's Dig In

[Palin Powered] Short and sweet, here are a few thoughts about Sarah Barracuda Palin and her v.p. acceptance speech at the RNC last night:

1. Masterful speech. Delegates and more importantly, the rest of the country, finally learned something of the mystery candidate from Wasilla, Alaska. She was gritty, personable and managed to come across as EveryWoman. Thanks, McCain speechwriters!

2. Like the three who came before her, Romney, Huckabee and Giuliani, Palin was snide and shitty toward Barack Obama and woefully stuck in the '80s. (To wit: Mike Huckabee's joke about a costume change at a Madonna concert. Cutting edge Republican humor!)

3. Finally, I hope this puts to rest any questions/attacks about Palin's potential ability of serving as a vice president while being a mother. I'm sick of reporters and political adversaries even bringing that up. Start asking male candidates the same question, start measuring their time and effort with their children and then we'll talk.

4. Besides, the focus on Palin's family and her skills at balancing work and family is merely superficial crap. From now until Election Day, the national press should have more than enough challenge in tracking down her record in Alaska. Twenty months as governor--of Alaska for hell's sake--shouldn't be too tough to scrutinize. I hope the press--always the convenient whipping boy among the right-wing-- is fanning out across the 49th state, stalking Palin's record and political history like a Kodiak bear after a fat salmon. Hey--she stood up last night and laid her record out to the world. She opened a window; now the media have an open door.

Meanwhile, read this from a formerly undecided voter on the Palin effect.

Oh, and while the Republicans remember her well you might not. Above, that's Madonna, from the '80s film Desperately Seeking Susan. The horror! (Holly Mullen)


  1. This post you linked looks a bit dishonest. I don't think I know a single undecided voter who has a Daily Kos diary. Her last entry (can't tell, was it her first too?) was a shot across Palin's bow.

    Anyway, I welcome scrutiny of Palin's record. Doesn't scare me.

    I'm anxious to see her on a stage with Biden.

  2. Democrats would be wise to simply ignore Sarah Palin. To do otherwise is to play into the Republican's strategy and to waste energy and focus from the real task at hand - convincing swing voters in battleground states that the Republican establishment is ethically bankrupt and offers no real solutions on the economy, energy, education, and the environment.

    Sarah Palin is there for one reason - to shore up a sleepy Republican base so John McCain can go after the independents with his "maverick" shtick. On that front we should be wailing away on him because it's disingenuous. The R's are having some fun riling the D's up by calling Palin a "reformer". It's nonsense and they know it - a delicious red herring - bait!!! They wait for the D's to get all uppity and then cherry-pick the extreme reactions as locker-room motivation for their ongoing "we're the victim" approach.

    Sarah Palin is not worth one minute of our time. Let's stay focused on what really matters - winning this election! Obama/Biden is a great ticket and the moderates will swing our way if we stay on message.

  3. C'mon, you aren't buying that "don't be mean to the hockey mom" crap, are you? That's a total straw man argument the rethugs are throwing up in a desperate attempt to to distract people from the real issues surrounding her: McCain's off-the-cuff choice, her Neanderthal social values, her corrupt record, her hypocrisy... if they get everyone thinking that you can't say anything about her because it's an "attack on women," you've lost the argument. Besides, the McSame camp are the ones who brought up the whole Bristol thing, and keep hammering it (see above).

  4. Read the post again, rdale. I did not say we shouldn't examine Palin's social values--those would be fair game, especially because the GOP continues to try and frame itself as the only party with morality.

    I DID say questions about Palin's ability to balance work/politics/family should go away. Why is any of it relevant? And even if it were, she has plenty of help with the kids.

    None of that is the debate. I'm on board with craigj, just above you. Issues, people. Records, people. George W. Bush, people. These are the things we need to concentrate on for the next two months. The Republicans have conveniently forgotten all about the dismal record of Bush--it's up to the rest of the country to make them answer for it.

  5. Holly, Palin's social and personal life is relevant because it is hypocritical. She runs for election based on a personal values platform, and she passes legislation on the same platform(cutting spending for unwed teen mothers and abstinence only education). Because she runs on this platform and uses it to pass legislation, her personal life becomes relevant and open to scrutiny. If she were not running on family values and trying to outlaw abortion and institute abstinence only eudcation then her personal life and her inability to teach her daughter the same values that she supposedly espouses, would not be relevant at all. but she is running on that, she does pass legislation because of it, therefore her personal life becomes open to scrutiny. she is a hypocrite. it is relevant because she can't even practice or teach her child to practice that which she wants to put into law for the rest of us!

  6. OK, one last time. READ the post. I absolutely agree Palin should be scrutinized for her positions on social questions such as family planning, abortion, abstinence only etc. But NOT on her ability to balance motherhood with her career.

    No one ever asks male candidates that question. Ever. So why do we continue to force female candidates to answer it? That was my point.

    I'm done now.

  7. I READ your post, Holly, and it makes it sound like she should not be scrutinized for her personal hypocrisy when you say "besides the focus on her family". Obviously, the other readers agree with me that your message is not clearly stated, sinec they are also operating under the same mis-interpretation. And I think all women agree that it should NOT be a question of whether she can balance family and work, that is definitely gender biased, and when i heard the reporter say it, i was offended.
    However, that said, this woman who says she is so proud for not having an abortion even though she knew her child had down syndrome, had the child, and went back to work 3 days later, leaving him to be cared for by some nurse. what kind of mother does that? That child needs more care and attention because of his special needs, and she can only give him 3 days? bad judgment, bad mother, bad politican.

  8. I thought the Madonna photo was from the "Like a Virgin" video


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.